Thursday, April 23, 2009
The one true art form
So how about a discussion about art? Here is the question: What is the one true art form? There are many forms of expression and an endless list of things that are considered art, but is there one (or some) artistic endeavour that holds more validity over another? What are the criteria? Is it even fair to compare dance to music, poetry to painting, etc.? Here is an idea, what art form stimulates the most senses? Painting covers sight and maybe touch and smell if you get close enough, and music triggers sound (well you could argue that a good concert experience can stimulate sight, sound, touch, and smell). Is there any art form that can use all of the senses? Sure, how about food. Food, or the dining experience, can offer something to all of the senses. Food should taste great, look pleasing, have the right texture, smell wonderful, and crackle with delight as it is being prepared. Take the classic Mexican fajita for example. Part of the joy of ordering this satisfying dish is the aroma and sound as it leaves the kitchen and arrives on your table (usually with everyone in the immediate vicinity looking over at you with that "I wish I ordered that" look on their face). Food is art, it just isn't thought of like that because everyone has to eat to survive. Art isn't about doing something different or expressive just for the idea of it, it can also be the transformation of something mundane (or something we all must do, like taking a shit or speaking) into an expressive representation of the human experience. Food is such a great example of art and it holds so many similarities with the "classical" forms. Food pleases the eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and brain. Anyone can create art, its just those with training or experience seem to be better at it. Just like chefs with prime rib or your grandmother and her heavenly cookies. It seems like famous chefs are gaining popularity as celebrities, but are they getting the recognition as artists? I feel that Morimoto is every bit the artist that Bono is, but is that the general consensus? Are we ready for art shows that focus on food instead of having an art show that is catered by a notable chef? But I digress......
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I get what you are saying, but I feel the distinction lies in the permanancy of the creation. How do future generations engage their senses in a pot roast that adorned a table last night? I agree that there is an artistic contribution that can be made to food preparation, but like all people of trade, the mastery of one's work can itself be considered art - in any industry. Of course, it's all subjective and that is the true beauty of art. It allows itself to be anything to anybody. Thanks for the contribution Swifty...it's nice to hear from you! This is Jbird - but I'm not signed in :)
ReplyDeleteThe permanancy of the art is not the point. Art is about the moment and experience, and what event can illustrate this more than the dining experience. Plus, permanancy was not available when Mozart and Bach were hard at work (sure their stuff was written down but I'm talkin' about being there or actually hearing it). I think we are all spoiled with recorded music and most of us have never had the true "concert experience". (Well some of us have. I mean, didn't we see the Police?) :)
ReplyDeleteWe are all spoiled with a lot of things. This is definitely true. And yes...The Police experience was an artistic high point in my life. Speaking of which, DM in August - YOU NEED TO GO! Anyway, you are right, art can be about the moment and experience and maybe the fact that the art you speak of is fleeting/perishable makes it even more unique. Because it can only be captured once and for a very brief time. I'm starting to get on board...maybe. Yet,to say it is the one true art form - I'm not there yet.
ReplyDelete